G.R. No.

L-2855 July 30, 1949

BORIS MEJOFF, petitioner,
vs.
DIRECTOR OF PRISONS, respondent.
FACTS:
Petitioner Boris Mejoff is an alien of Russian descent who was brought to this country from Shanghai as
a secret operative by the Japanese forces during the latter's regime in these Islands. Upon liberation he
was arrested as a Japanese spy, by U. S. Army Counter Intelligence Corps. He was handed by the
government and later on ordered his release. But it was found out that he had entered the Philippines
illegally without inspection and admission by the immigration officials thus ordered his deportation on
the first available transportation to Russia. The petitioner was then detained while arrangements for
his deportation are being made. Thereafter two boats of Russian nationality arrived but their masters
refused to take petitioner.
ISSUE: Whether or not too long detention of the petitioner was valid?
HELD:
The Supreme Court ruled against the petitioner.
Under section 37 of the Philippine Immigration Act of 1940 any alien who enters this country "without
inspection and admission by the immigration authorities at a designated point of entry" is subject to
deportation within five years. In a recent decision of a similar litigation (Borovsky vs. Commissioner of
Immigration) we denied the request for habeas corpus, saying:
"It must be admitted that temporary detention is a necessary step in the process of exclusion or
expulsion of undesirable aliens and that pending arrangements for his deportation, the Government
has the right to hold the undesirable alien under confinement for a reasonable lenght of time.
However, under established precedents, too long a detention may justify the issuance of a writ of
habeas corpus.
"The meaning of "reasonable time" depends upon the circumstances, specially the difficulties of
obtaining a passport, the availability of transfortation, the diplomatic arrangements concerned and the
efforts displayed to send the deportee away. Considering that this Government desires to expel the
alien, and does not relish keeping him at the people's expense, we must presume it is making efforts to
carry out the decree of exclusion by the highest officer of the land. On top of this presumption

assurances were made during the oral argument that the Government is really trying to expedite the
expulsion of this petitioner. On the other hand, the record fails to show how long he has been under
confinement since the last time he was apprehended. Neither does he indicate neglected opportunities
to send him abroad. And unless it is shown that the deportee is being indefinitely imprisoned under the
pretense of awaiting a chance for deportation or unless the Government admits that it can not deport
him or unless the detainee is being held for too long a period our courts will not interfere.

Separate Opinion
"To continue keeping petitioner under confinement is a thing that shocks conscience. Under the
circumstances, petitioner is entitled to be released from confinement. He has not been convicted for
any offense for which he may be imprisoned. Government's inability to deport him no pretext to keep
him imprisoned for an indefinite length of time. The constitutional guarantee that no person shall be
deprived of liberty without due process of law has been intended to protect all inhabitants or residents
who may happen to be under the shadows of Philippine flag. Our vote is to grant the petition and to
order the immediate release of petitioner, without prejudice for the government to deport him as soon
as the government could have the means to do so. In the meantime, petitioner is entitled to live a
normal life in a peaceful country, ruled by the principles of law and justice."